Tauiliili Reinstated

[riverside6]

ACC Now is reporting that Michael Tauiliili has been re-instated (http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/index.php?title=duke_reinstates_tauiliili&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1) in a somewhat surprising move. He is suspended for the Connecticut game, but that is it.

This is great news for the defense.

[Bluedawg]

ACC Now is reporting that Michael Tauiliili has been re-instated (http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/index.php?title=duke_reinstates_tauiliili&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1) in a somewhat surprising move. He is suspended for the Connecticut game, but that is it.

This is great news for the defense.


I could not find this on the Go duke site so i went looking for confirmation.

On Inside Carolina I found Tauiliili Reinstated To Duke Gridiron Program (http://northcarolina.scout.com/a.z?s=78&p=2&c=669052)

And on WRAL.com Posted 32 minutes ago is this; Duke Reinstates Linebacker Tauiliili (http://www.wral.com/sports/story/1710447/)

you are correct, it is the best news.

[watzone]

Official (http://myblogdevils.eponym.com/blog/_archives/2007/8/16/3162593.html)

With what happened in LAX situation, Duke is not juming to conclusions. You can bet they know more details. Also, this was not just Ted Roof's decision. I have heard a few things locally, but they are unsubstantiated. It will certainly help the team, in that the defense is looking pretty good in the pre season.

[tombrady]

Official (http://myblogdevils.eponym.com/blog/_archives/2007/8/16/3162593.html)

With what happened in LAX situation, Duke is not juming to conclusions. You can bet they know more details. Also, this was not just Ted Roof's decision. I have heard a few things locally, but they are unsubstantiated. It will certainly help the team, in that the defense is looking pretty good in the pre season.

ESPN has this story on their front page, surprisingly.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2977393

[dukie8]

I could not find this on the Go duke site so i went looking for confirmation.

On Inside Carolina I found Tauiliili Reinstated To Duke Gridiron Program (http://northcarolina.scout.com/a.z?s=78&p=2&c=669052)

And on WRAL.com Posted 32 minutes ago is this; Duke Reinstates Linebacker Tauiliili (http://www.wral.com/sports/story/1710447/)

you are correct, it is the best news.

how is a uconn-esque slap on the wrist the best news? if the allegations are correct -- dwi, illegal possession of a gun, assault with a deadly weapon and failure to stop after causing an accident (or something like that) -- then he should be expelled from school.

[TheDuke11]

^you are assuming that all of that was fact. It seems as if none of that ever actually occured or he would have been kicked out of school and off the team.

[dukie8]

^you are assuming that all of that was fact. It seems as if none of that ever actually occured or he would have been kicked out of school and off the team.

based on what? he was charged with these crimes and is due in court on oct 4. even roof said "We also will allow the judicial system run it’s course, and the outcome of that process could require further disciplinary action." he should be suspended indefinitely until the legal case is concluded.

it also shows what a joke it was that duke suspended the lax 3 "for protection" under a usually never enforced policy of suspending anyone accused of committing a felony.

[riverside6]

how is a uconn-esque slap on the wrist the best news? if the allegations are correct -- dwi, illegal possession of a gun, assault with a deadly weapon and failure to stop after causing an accident (or something like that) -- then he should be expelled from school.
I think we were all thinking in terms of Duke football.

[dukie8]

I think we were all thinking in terms of Duke football.

duke should be above pulling a calhoun. this disgusts me. all this to maybe win a single football game?

[riverside6]

I certainly think you make a solid point, but I simply can't speak for what Duke knows so I'm waiting till I know more. I just know that this is going to help Duke Football, so I'm excited about that.

[Bluedawg]

I certainly think you make a solid point, but I simply can't speak for what Duke knows so I'm waiting till I know more. I just know that this is going to help Duke Football, so I'm excited about that.

I would think that after Lax all eyes are on Duke so they would tread carefully through a mine field such as this.

[watzone]

I would think that after Lax all eyes are on Duke so they would tread carefully through a mine field such as this.


Exactly! This decision had to have a lot of thought behind it.

[riverside6]

I would think that after Lax all eyes are on Duke so they would tread carefully through a mine field such as this.
I would certainly hope so!

[dukie8]

Exactly! This decision had to have a lot of thought behind it.

based on how much thought (or lack thereof) that went into a lot of the lax actions, i would say that that is a big assumption. the bottom line is that he has been charged with multiple serious crimes and should not be playing or a student until they are adjudicated.

[buddy]

Ryan MacFayden sends a tasteless private e-mail, and gets suspended. Mike f/k/a Brown is accused of drunk driving and other serious charges, and gets 1 game. I wonder why Duke was so reasonable with Mike and so unreasonable with MacFayden. I really don't know what to think. It's good for the football team, but seems to establish an unfortunate double standard, based possibly on the color of the individual's skin. I'm not saying the current result is right or wrong, but I can't square it with MacFayden's treatment, and the fact no one ever apologized to him or expressed regret for what was a serious invasion of his privacy.

[watzone]

Ryan MacFayden sends a tasteless private e-mail, and gets suspended. Mike f/k/a Brown is accused of drunk driving and other serious charges, and gets 1 game. I wonder why Duke was so reasonable with Mike and so unreasonable with MacFayden. I really don't know what to think. It's good for the football team, but seems to establish an unfortunate double standard, based possibly on the color of the individual's skin. I'm not saying the current result is right or wrong, but I can't square it with MacFayden's treatment, and the fact no one ever apologized to him or expressed regret for what was a serious invasion of his privacy.

There is no doubt that at this point you can make an argument against the decision. You would think they know something substantial though.

[SoCalDukeFan]

I was with a friend who is an assistant coach for a West Coast Conference bball team. He asked me about Duke football and I told him that the best defensive player had been suspended for a dwi, gun possession etc. His immediate response was "He will be back." I did not think so. Guess I was wrong.

It does seem to me that Duke needs to treat indicted students as innocent until proven guilty or unless there is some overwhelming reason to do otherwise (such as a confession).

SoCal

[Jim3k]

Well, the deadly weapon(s) were an air pistol and a knife.

So--some speculation:

The knife may be explainable and may not have been been used at all in the incident.

The air pistol may not be considered a firearm for felony purposes. Probably discretionary with the prosecution.

So the two main charges are assault (may be only a misdemeanor) and the DWI and underage drinking. It's conceivable that no felony charge is being pursued and that Roof is aware of that change.

Someone in Durham can go to the DA's office and find out for sure.

(While you're there, see if you can find Nifong's lost bar ID card. He says he never got one, but it's probably on the floor there. :p )

[Shammrog]

There is no doubt that at this point you can make an argument against the decision. You would think they know something substantial though.

I think there are two factors in play here:

1. After the lacrosse debacle, Duke is (for a change) not jumping to act until they have a good idea what the situation is. As watzone says, you would think/hope they know something. (They did in the lacrosse case, but let the suspensions, etc. drag out anyway, which brings me to #2...)
2. This incident doesn't have the political correctness implications, and political currency with certain members of the faculty and community that the lacrosse case did. That the football player is black can't hurt, may help, but probably isn't much of a factor in the decision.

[JG Nothing]

Ryan MacFayden sends a tasteless private e-mail, and gets suspended. Mike f/k/a Brown is accused of drunk driving and other serious charges, and gets 1 game. I wonder why Duke was so reasonable with Mike and so unreasonable with MacFayden. I really don't know what to think. It's good for the football team, but seems to establish an unfortunate double standard, based possibly on the color of the individual's skin. I'm not saying the current result is right or wrong, but I can't square it with MacFayden's treatment, and the fact no one ever apologized to him or expressed regret for what was a serious invasion of his privacy.

Can you please document that McFadyen was suspended as a form of punishment? According to his lawyer it was for his own safety. From the N&O, April 5, 2006:
"Ryan McFadyen, the lacrosse player at the center of an e-mail that police say was sent shortly after a woman reported that she was raped at a lacrosse party on March 13 has been suspended from Duke University, according to his lawyer. Glen Bachman said he did not know why McFadyen was suspended but believed it had to do with the player's safety. He said he did not know of any specific disciplinary action the school had taken. "I think it was a safety concern for him and the university," Bachman said in an interview."

Given all the concerns at the time about the New Black Panthers and the possibility of retaliation from the Durham community, suspending McFadyen could certainly be viewed as a prudent, precautionary action.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

That the football player is black can't hurt, may help, but probably isn't much of a factor in the decision.

Tauiliili is Samoan.

[dukie8]

Can you please document that McFadyen was suspended as a form of punishment? According to his lawyer it was for his own safety. From the N&O, April 5, 2006:
"Ryan McFadyen, the lacrosse player at the center of an e-mail that police say was sent shortly after a woman reported that she was raped at a lacrosse party on March 13 has been suspended from Duke University, according to his lawyer. Glen Bachman said he did not know why McFadyen was suspended but believed it had to do with the player's safety. He said he did not know of any specific disciplinary action the school had taken. "I think it was a safety concern for him and the university," Bachman said in an interview."

Given all the concerns at the time about the New Black Panthers and the possibility of retaliation from the Durham community, suspending McFadyen could certainly be viewed as a prudent, precautionary action.

we discussed the suspensions ad nauseum last year. mcfadyen never was charged with a crime and, to my knowledge, never was given a chance to explain the email's american psycho parody attempt (at least not before he was suspended). your cite doesn't really support your belief that the suspension was for mcfadyen's safety -- his lawyer readily admits that he didn't know why he was suspended and then took a guess that it was for "safety." if the duke admin really thinks that a student is in danger -- and i think that it was fairly safe to conclude that mcfadyen was after the illegal leak of his email -- then there are many other better ways to address it than just suspending him and throwing him to the wolves. i don't recall any reports of duke providing him or any other players with protective security or working with the players to get them to a safe and secure location when events were very tense. how is just suspending (and nothing else) a student supposed to protect him from violence?

on a related note, what is going on with respect to the investigation regarding the illegal leak of mcfadyen's email and the illegal access/use of a player's email account by which the fraudlent email was sent?

[Jim3k]

Mike f/k/a Brown is accused of drunk driving and other serious charges, and gets [suspended for] 1 game.

Sort of.

He has actually been suspended from practice for 2-3 weeks and has also lost his starting job to someone else. You and I may think that is no punishment at all. But a football coach and his player are going to think differently about that. Starting is earned on the practice field and has value to both the player and the coach. A suspension strips that achievement from the player. So I think this is more than a 1 game punishment. Maybe not too much more, but something more.

[buddy]

The University suspended MacFayden, while the Athletic Department is handling this matter. We've all been told that the "listening ad" was really about underage drinking, and not an accusation of rape. So this is a case of underage drinking as well--so why no ads, no punishment?

Don't get me wrong--Michael has suffered. My daughter had a class with him, and he seemed to her like a nice enough kid. Who knows why he did what he did. But the differences in treatment are striking. While I can't cite "why" MacFayden was suspended, it is conceded there were no hearings and he was not afforded any due process rights. Gee, if the school suspends every student who they feel may be threatened by a hate group, then they have turned over the keys of the asylum to the inmates. Surely the university should care enough to assure the safety of students.

[cspan37421]

I sure hope there's nothing to the charges, because if we win a few games with his help, perhaps because we care more about winning than competing with honor, we won't hear the end of it - nor should we.

[JG Nothing]

[QUOTE]your cite doesn't really support your belief that the suspension was for mcfadyen's safety -- his lawyer readily admits that he didn't know why he was suspended and then took a guess that it was for "safety."
Actually, I am sure McFayden's lawyer was not simply guessing, but offering an educated guess. Given that his lawyer was much closer to the situation than most of us, his "guess" shouldn't be so blithely dismissed, unless, of course, it fits your personal agenda.
I do not know if McFayden was suspended as punishment, for his own safety, or some combination thereof. However, I doubt you do either. Presenting speculation as unqualified truth is dishonest. Of course, if your primary concern is simply making the administration look bad, then it is a good strategy.


if the duke admin really thinks that a student is in danger -- and i think that it was fairly safe to conclude that mcfadyen was after the illegal leak of his email -- then there are many other better ways to address it than just suspending him and throwing him to the wolves.
McFadyen was removed from campus. He was not "thrown to the wolves." He was sent home far away from Durham and far away from the epicenter of all the drama.

James Coleman offers a slightly different justification of the use of suspension in the May-June 2007 Duke Magazine: "Law professor James Coleman, praised by all sides for his conscientious leadership of last spring's investigation of the off-field behavior of lacrosse players, says some of the criticism of the university's stance fails to recognize legal realities—or the workings of a campus. Had university officials decided that students caught up in a rape investigation presented no danger to the community and so were not subject to suspension, Duke parents would have been justified in questioning the administration's apparent lack of concern for campus safety, he says."

[Stray Gator]

... if the duke admin really thinks that a student is in danger -- and i think that it was fairly safe to conclude that mcfadyen was after the illegal leak of his email -- then there are many other better ways to address it than just suspending him and throwing him to the wolves. i don't recall any reports of duke providing him or any other players with protective security or working with the players to get them to a safe and secure location when events were very tense. ,,,

Whether McFayden chose to go home (which is what I recall being reported by some sources at the time) or was ordered to go home by the Administration, the bottom line for me is that he did get to a secure and safe environment during a dangerous time; and there's no evidence that Duke would have simply thrown him out on the street--or "to the wolves," if you prefer--if for any reason going home had not been a feasible option.

But the notion that the University should have provided McFayden or other lacrosse players with "protective security" is simply untenable. Are you suggesting that Duke had a duty to provide a security detail for individual students on campus? Was the University supposed to assign Duke Police officers or hire private security officers to stand guard outside their doors every night and shadow them throughout the day to classes, to meals, etc. like bodyguards?

[Highlander]

on a related note, what is going on with respect to the investigation regarding the illegal leak of mcfadyen's email and the illegal access/use of a player's email account by which the fraudlent email was sent?

To answer your question, I doubt anything is going on there, because investigating a fabricated/hoaxed email is not worthy of a police investigation. Heck, I get over 100 fabricated/hoaxed emails every month, and no one is investigating them :) Besides, I believe McFayden was reinstated too, and got his entire year of eligibility back from the NCAA. So his treatment from the administration is at least similar to Michael's.

As an aside, I'm not sure this whole lacrosse rehash is really on topic, but I'll leave it to the mods to decide that.

[dukie8]

Actually, I am sure McFayden's lawyer was not simply guessing, but offering an educated guess. Given that his lawyer was much closer to the situation than most of us, his "guess" shouldn't be so blithely dismissed, unless, of course, it fits your personal agenda.
I do not know if McFayden was suspended as punishment, for his own safety, or some combination thereof. However, I doubt you do either. Presenting speculation as unqualified truth is dishonest. Of course, if your primary concern is simply making the administration look bad, then it is a good strategy.

so are you implying that there is a difference between a mere guess and an educated guess? please. mcfayden's lawyer expressly stated that he did not know why he was suspended. that's about all i needed to know when it came out. please provide where i "present[ed] speculation as unqualified truth." i still, to this day, have no idea why mcfayden was suspended. the fact that it took duke until june to lift the suspension was deplorable. it was just another black eye for duke's admin.


McFadyen was removed from campus. He was not "thrown to the wolves." He was sent home far away from Durham and far away from the epicenter of all the drama.

please provide a site indicating that he was "sent home far away from Durham." he was suspended from duke and that's it. i'm not sure where you think duke has the power to legally send individuals to different parts of the country on its whim. this isn't china. if mcfayden decided to leave the state, then that was his business but duke had nothing to do with it.


James Coleman offers a slightly different justification of the use of suspension in the May-June 2007 Duke Magazine: "Law professor James Coleman, praised by all sides for his conscientious leadership of last spring's investigation of the off-field behavior of lacrosse players, says some of the criticism of the university's stance fails to recognize legal realities—or the workings of a campus. Had university officials decided that students caught up in a rape investigation presented no danger to the community and so were not subject to suspension, Duke parents would have been justified in questioning the administration's apparent lack of concern for campus safety, he says."

that argument is bunk. as i mentioned last year, there were multiple known date rapists at duke when i was there who had violated multiple victims. duke was fully aware of it and did nothing -- no suspensions, no expulsions, and no discipline. so it's not like duke has a history of being proactive with protecting the campus from KNOWN rapists (not falsely accused ones). moreover, mcfadyen was NOT indicted for rate and was suspended entirely for a single, albeit offensive, email. that's very different.

[dukie8]

The University suspended MacFayden, while the Athletic Department is handling this matter. We've all been told that the "listening ad" was really about underage drinking, and not an accusation of rape. So this is a case of underage drinking as well--so why no ads, no punishment?

Don't get me wrong--Michael has suffered. My daughter had a class with him, and he seemed to her like a nice enough kid. Who knows why he did what he did. But the differences in treatment are striking. While I can't cite "why" MacFayden was suspended, it is conceded there were no hearings and he was not afforded any due process rights. Gee, if the school suspends every student who they feel may be threatened by a hate group, then they have turned over the keys of the asylum to the inmates. Surely the university should care enough to assure the safety of students.

why is the university not handling a student who gets charged with multiple violent crimes? something really stinks here. very uconnesque.

[dukie8]

Whether McFayden chose to go home (which is what I recall being reported by some sources at the time) or was ordered to go home by the Administration, the bottom line for me is that he did get to a secure and safe environment during a dangerous time; and there's no evidence that Duke would have simply thrown him out on the street--or "to the wolves," if you prefer--if for any reason going home had not been a feasible option.

But the notion that the University should have provided McFayden or other lacrosse players with "protective security" is simply untenable. Are you suggesting that Duke had a duty to provide a security detail for individual students on campus? Was the University supposed to assign Duke Police officers or hire private security officers to stand guard outside their doors every night and shadow them throughout the day to classes, to meals, etc. like bodyguards?

no. i think that the whole "we had to suspend the lax 3 for their own safety" explanation that duke gave was a joke. you don't suspend someone to protect someone. if safety really is an issue, then you work with that person to get that person out of harm's way and academic standing becomes a very secondary issue. iirc, the fact that they were suspended meant that they were unable to take classes elsewhere (including all fall). if safety were the primary concern, then why did duke ensure that they would be academically hamstrung for the rest of the year?

[dukie8]

To answer your question, I doubt anything is going on there, because investigating a fabricated/hoaxed email is not worthy of a police investigation. Heck, I get over 100 fabricated/hoaxed emails every month, and no one is investigating them :) Besides, I believe McFayden was reinstated too, and got his entire year of eligibility back from the NCAA. So his treatment from the administration is at least similar to Michael's.



the hoax email (fraudulently using someone's email account) and the leaking of the american psycho email both are crimes in and of themselves (i'm pretty sure that leaking the email is a felony but someone might want to confirm that). i'm not sure you understand the severity of either the da or the pd leaking confidential and highly prejudicial information in conjunction with an investigation. that is entirely different from receiving the latest spam email that sneaks through your email filters. it is a BIG deal if the durham pd did it and i thought it was being investigated with the rogue cops investigation.

[gep]

It's interesting to me how "different" subjects can eventually lead back to the lacrosse-incident-related discussions. Even with the lacrosse board still open, these discussions eventually migrate over to the main board one way or another. I hope we can all finally move on...

[JG Nothing]

so are you implying that there is a difference between a mere guess and an educated guess?
No, I am not implying that there is a difference between a mere guess and an educated guess, I am asserting that there is a difference. Actually, I should have never adopted that term from your original response. The lawyer never said he was simply guessing.


mcfayden's lawyer expressly stated that he did not know why he was suspended.
He also expressly stated "I believe it was a safety concern for him and the university." Once again, McFayden's lawyer was much closer to the situation than most of us. He could have easily said that he didn't know why his client was suspended.


please provide where i "present[ed] speculation as unqualified truth." i still, to this day, have no idea why mcfayden was suspended.
I apologize for lumping you in with others who have made the claim. In the interest of accuracy, I hope I can count on you to also correct people who assert as fact that McFayden's suspension was a punishment.



please provide a site indicating that he was "sent home far away from Durham." he was suspended from duke and that's it. i'm not sure where you think duke has the power to legally send individuals to different parts of the country on its whim.
Come on, you know what I meant. You're not that dense.


that argument is bunk. as i mentioned last year, there were multiple known date rapists at duke when i was there who had violated multiple victims. duke was fully aware of it and did nothing -- no suspensions, no expulsions, and no discipline. so it's not like duke has a history of being proactive with protecting the campus from KNOWN rapists (not falsely accused ones). moreover, mcfadyen was NOT indicted for rate and was suspended entirely for a single, albeit offensive, email. that's very different.
That is seriously tragic. How did the administration respond when you demanded that the university hold the known rapists accountable for their crimes?

By the way, according to an article in the April 5, 2006 N&O, Brodhead stated “in situations where a threat to the safety of an individual or members of the university community exists, Vice President Moneta typically executes an interim suspension.” Did Brodhead ever publicly claim that McFayden's suspension was to punish him?

[hondoheel]

I sure hope there's nothing to the charges, because if we win a few games with his help, perhaps because we care more about winning than competing with honor, we won't hear the end of it - nor should we.


I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. ;)

[Uncle Drew]

This was posted by DBR............

What if either Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, or some other person or persons in the Durham Police Department, were angry (for whatever their own specific reasons are) about the lacrosse case? What if someone decided to take an opportunity to try to embarrass Duke, and used Taulliili as their means to that end?

We’re not saying that this is what happened; far from it. But what we will say is this: given the performance of the department in the lacrosse case, and the unfair treatment meted out to Duke students by certain officials, the Durham Police Department will have to work hard to re-establish their good name, and to make this sort of speculation seem highly unlikely. As of now, unfortunately the department’s reputation and recent performance does not place it above suspicion.

When Taullili was arrested I was bummed because he is one of our better players and I myself was surprised when he was reinstated. Now we have fans suggesting Duke is giving him a UCONN type slap on the wrist. While some of us are giving it a LAX, guilty until proven innocent attitude. The truth is somewhere in between, but DBR may be right and Duke can no longer get a fair deal after LAX was proved to have more holes than swiss cheese. So I think it's time for Duke to move back to Trinity NC where it all began. The vacuum created might make Wake move back to Wake Forrest NC. Just put Duke Chapel on wheels and air lift Cameron!

[Highlander]

the hoax email (fraudulently using someone's email account) and the leaking of the american psycho email both are crimes in and of themselves (i'm pretty sure that leaking the email is a felony but someone might want to confirm that). i'm not sure you understand the severity of either the da or the pd leaking confidential and highly prejudicial information in conjunction with an investigation. that is entirely different from receiving the latest spam email that sneaks through your email filters. it is a BIG deal if the durham pd did it and i thought it was being investigated with the rogue cops investigation.

Do you have evidence that the DA leak McFayden's email? I thought it was much more likely leaked by a student who received it from Ryan or via a fwd to the media. If I give a letter I received to the Media, that's not a felony. Also, you're speculating that the DA send the hoax email. I've never seen any proof that they did. For all we know, it COULD have been a spammer or hacker. And I don't think there's any way to prove it one way or the other, ergo no results from any investigation.

I hope McFayden learned a valuable lesson. Nothing is ever confidential on the internet.

And again, I'm not sure what a rehash on McFayden's email has to do with the football player (I don't want to butcher his last name). Both were suspended initially, both were reinstated once more information was obtained. Seems like a pretty consistent response to me.

[cspan37421]

IF the charges against Tauiliili are fabricated by the Durham PD to any degree, what can Duke or student families do to bring this out-of-control city to its knees? Would a civil suit do anything but bankrupt them? They still have elections so I don't know how you get a change in management/operation even if you do bankrupt them.

[dukie8]

And again, I'm not sure what a rehash on McFayden's email has to do with the football player (I don't want to butcher his last name). Both were suspended initially, both were reinstated once more information was obtained. Seems like a pretty consistent response to me.

this is exactly the kind of comparison that people SHOULDN'T be making.

macfadyen: his only act was sending a disgusting email to a friend. he broke no laws. he was suspended FROM DUKE without duke admin talking to him. it quickly came out that someone leaked the email (it remains to be seen who did that) and duke dragged its feet 2 months before reinstating him.

tauliili: arrested and charged with multiple offenses, some of which are violent offenses and i believe that some of which are felonies (the reports are vague). he was suspended merely for 1 football game (NOT from duke) and will be back in class and on the field before he is next due in court. NOTHING has yet been established (guilt or innocence) but duke nonetheless believes that this fine young individual, with pending violent offenses, should be attending class and playing his sport while the case works its way through the judicial system.

if duke has a policy of suspending any student that is charged with a felony or is deemed to be a "danger" to other students, which was dusted off for the lax 3, then why is this rogue character allowed to be anywhere near the campus while his case is pending??? he very well may be innocent (with the durham da and pd you never really know), but, in the interim, it is completely ridiculous the double standard that duke is utilizing here.

[dukie8]

Do you have evidence that the DA leak McFayden's email? I thought it was much more likely leaked by a student who received it from Ryan or via a fwd to the media. If I give a letter I received to the Media, that's not a felony. Also, you're speculating that the DA send the hoax email. I've never seen any proof that they did. For all we know, it COULD have been a spammer or hacker. And I don't think there's any way to prove it one way or the other, ergo no results from any investigation.

no, i specifically stated that i don't know and asked what was going on with the investigation (if there even is one at this point). i don't agree with all the points lew rockwell makes regarding the email but he states that the police received the email and it wasn't from the players. if that's true, then someone broke the law in handing it over and the police broke the law in disclosing it. he also thinks that the police sent the hoax email but doesn't say why. in any event, it is an interesting read and shines the spot light on what likely was illegal activity concerning the 2 emails in question.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson188.html

[RepoMan]

why is the university not handling a student who gets charged with multiple violent crimes? something really stinks here. very uconnesque.

You'd think that people would learn to wait before rushing to judgment, particularly when they have no access whatsoever to the information available to the people who are making the decisions that are being critiqued. I know its a message board, but jeesh.

[Shammrog]

no. i think that the whole "we had to suspend the lax 3 for their own safety" explanation that duke gave was a joke. you don't suspend someone to protect someone. if safety really is an issue, then you work with that person to get that person out of harm's way and academic standing becomes a very secondary issue. iirc, the fact that they were suspended meant that they were unable to take classes elsewhere (including all fall). if safety were the primary concern, then why did duke ensure that they would be academically hamstrung for the rest of the year?

Absolutely right. The whole suspending him for his safety argument reminded me of the East German/Soviet excuse for the Berlin Wall - "to keep out Western decadence." Of course, they never explained why the gun towers faced inward...

[dukie8]

You'd think that people would learn to wait before rushing to judgment, particularly when they have no access whatsoever to the information available to the people who are making the decisions that are being critiqued. I know its a message board, but jeesh.

how does the public have "no access whatsoever to the information available to the people who are making decisions." it's not even in question that this fine student athlete has been arrested and charged with multiple violent crimes. they may be trumped up but until that is played out in a court of law, he has zero business attending classes and playing football at duke on a full ride.

[DevilAlumna]

if duke has a policy of suspending any student that is charged with a felony or is deemed to be a "danger" to other students, which was dusted off for the lax 3, then why is this rogue character allowed to be anywhere near the campus while his case is pending??? he very well may be innocent (with the durham da and pd you never really know), but, in the interim, it is completely ridiculous the double standard that duke is utilizing here.

To me, this is a sign that perhaps Duke learned a lesson from last spring, on how to not rush to judgement, and is applying it here. Not so much a double standard, as an improved standard.

[RepoMan]

how does the public have "no access whatsoever to the information available to the people who are making decisions." it's not even in question that this fine student athlete has been arrested and charged with multiple violent crimes. they may be trumped up but until that is played out in a court of law, he has zero business attending classes and playing football at duke on a full ride.

Nice sarcasm from someone who, presumably, doesn't know the kid at all.

It must be nice to be so certain of things. Unfortunately, in the real world, those things aren't so black and white.

[dukie8]

Nice sarcasm from someone who, presumably, doesn't know the kid at all.

It must be nice to be so certain of things. Unfortunately, in the real world, those things aren't so black and white.

it's black and white that he was arrested for multiple violent crimes. what part of that do you not understand? if he didn't commit them, then he will be able to defend himself in court. until then, it is a disgrace that duke is letting him stay in school and play games on the field.

[Uncle Drew]

I have read through each post about this guy being reinstated and both sides make valid points. But at the same time it's clear some posters think anyone arrested is guilty until proven innocent. I have a question if you yourself were arrested for something similar or even worse would your employer automatically fire you or lay you off without pay? Okay in North Carolina a worker basically has no rights and employers can fire an employee for sneezing too many times in a day. But a former coworker I know was arrested for assault and threatening with a deadly weapon. The arrest ended up in the paper and my former company fired him for it. (He had been a model employee to that point.) It ended up in court that he had come home, caught his girlfriend in bed with another man who pulled a gun on him. A struggle insued in his own house and he managed to get the gun away from the guy and broke the guys nose with the gun handle. All charges were dropped, the gun owner was charged and the police who brought the original charges were fired. A month later my former company had to settle out of court for a huge undisclosed amount of money.
Apparently one thing a lot of people don't remember about the LAX scandal is Duke had to settle out of court with the players so not to get their pants sued off. I'm not saying Tauiliili did it or not. But if he eventually is found not guilty or guilty of lesser charges and Duke didn't make some attempt to stand behind him they are asking for another lawsuit / settlement. People want to say he's getting a UCONN slap on the wrist. If that player in question had been found not guilty UCONN could have gotten their a** sued too.

[cspan37421]

the presumption of innocence applies between the government and its citizens, not an employer and employee, or college and student, unless of course the employer or college is unusually magnanimous. It has been said before, an employer doesn't have to keep on someone who is busy defending themselves of a felony. A good employer will take them back later if they were otherwise a good employee and are found to be not guilty. Some may not want any controversy at all, and let's face it, some folks in this world are around trouble all the time, whether they're convicted of it or not. So employers don't have to keep folks like that around - unless it is written in their contract (individually or collectively bargained).

In this situation I normally would not be in favor of keeping a guy on a team while he's defending a felony charge (esp. if a violent felony). BUT, the Durham PD has rightfully lost credibility and thus I'm not sure the normal standards should apply in this case. If our guy has corroborating witnesses and is being set up on the serious charges, I fully understand Roof et al only giving him a slap on the wrist for speeding or whatever he was actually doing.

It goes back to credibility, a commodity that the Durham PD and DA's office is rather short of lately.

[RepoMan]

it's black and white that he was arrested for multiple violent crimes. what part of that do you not understand? if he didn't commit them, then he will be able to defend himself in court. until then, it is a disgrace that duke is letting him stay in school and play games on the field.

Is it so hard to entertain the possibility that perhaps there are nuances to the situation that are known to Duke, the athletic department, and Roof that are not known to you or the general public?

Duke certainly doesn't have a long history of off-handedly dismissing criminal allegations levied against athletes so that their athletic teams are not damaged (see Lax case for recent evidence of the foregoing). Maybe you should consider giving them the benefit of the doubt, at least until they have proven unworthy of such benefit.

Or not. If you'd prefer to conclude that Duke's actions are a "disgrace," despite your admitted ignorance of anything other than the charge, its a free world. Its just disappointing to me to see Duke fans so quick to condemn.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I'm tired of you guys pissing back and forth at each other. Stop it. Now. Dukie8's posts remind me of other "one sided discussions" from years past, although they haven't dropped to the level of personal attacks. Why don't y'all drop it until the case is resolved.

See, I told everyone on the off topic board that if you live in the south long enough you start saying "y'all".

[duketaylor]

OZ, y'all is so much easier to say than "youse guysz" it isn't even funny. And you know as well as I, we're very lazy down here in the south;) Let's play golf sometime!! We can play in Richmond and drag gw67 down here for a round. If he's still around.

[dukie8]

I'm tired of you guys pissing back and forth at each other. Stop it. Now. Dukie8's posts remind me of other "one sided discussions" from years past, although they haven't dropped to the level of personal attacks. Why don't y'all drop it until the case is resolved.

See, I told everyone on the off topic board that if you live in the south long enough you start saying "y'all".

do you actually expect people to express no opinions on the matter until everything is adjudicated?

[OZZIE4DUKE]

do you actually expect people to express no opinions on the matter until everything is adjudicated?

Well, no, not at all. But having a zillion posts arguing back and forth, with nothing new said, is boring. State your position, site your reasoning and sources, and if there aren't any say it is your opinion (which everyone is entitled to even if it is wrong - not saying your's is by any means), and then let others do the same. Don't feel obligated to argue every point. One or two responses to valid questions are OK, especially if specific questions are asked and you have the answer. If you don't, let someone else respond, or let it go unanswered until the next time the topic emerges (which it inevitably will, hence the reason for Throaty's HPR :) ).

OK, I've said my piece and answered your question. It is my opinion and I probably won't say more on this topic until it crops up again.

Returning to the thread topic, I hope Tauiliili is just guilty of poor judgement and grossly overstated charges, not everything that is alleged, but I don't know.

[Highlander]

no, i specifically stated that i don't know and asked what was going on with the investigation (if there even is one at this point). i don't agree with all the points lew rockwell makes regarding the email but he states that the police received the email and it wasn't from the players. if that's true, then someone broke the law in handing it over and the police broke the law in disclosing it. he also thinks that the police sent the hoax email but doesn't say why. in any event, it is an interesting read and shines the spot light on what likely was illegal activity concerning the 2 emails in question.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson188.html
(my emphasis added)

Your link may explain this, (and if so I'll have to view the link outside of work) but I am curious: why do you believe that is it against the law for someone to voluntarily hand over evidence (in this case, an email they received) to the authorities?

As for how the McFayden email was disclosed, I found this info on the smoking gun. If I read this correctly, according to this link (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0405061duke1.html), the email was released (and quoted in) page 5 of a search warrant that was unsealed. If that's the case, it looks like it was legally disclosed as part of an approved search warrant.